With respect to the sentence: *"I mention the dealers and distributors because the three-year obligation is theirs as well, but they generally have no idea how to fulfill it".*
I would agree that from GPLv2 text would emerge that commercial redistributors must provide they own source code offer, and they cannot be beneficiaries of the original distributor/manufacture ´s source code offer. Despite this, and regarding commercial resellers GPLv2 (section 3.a and 3.b) obligations imposed with respect to "source code offer", what I have observed, at least in Latin America´s countries is somehow the concept of "to provide source code to final licensee". That´s to say, regardless of the quantities of commercial resellers that it could be in a "distribution binary product´s chain" the original distributor/manufacturer would be the party that in practical terms would provide "the source code offer" to the "final licensee or end users" (despite the fact that the original distributor/manufacturer has no contractual relationship with the commercial redistributor´s end user/customer) and not the commercial redistributors (authorized by the original distributor/manufacturer to distributes their products). Many Thanks, Gustavo. El sáb., 4 ago. 2018 a las 9:00, < license-discuss-requ...@lists.opensource.org> escribió: > Send License-discuss mailing list submissions to > license-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > license-discuss-requ...@lists.opensource.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > license-discuss-ow...@lists.opensource.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of License-discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Source code availability after end of life (Bruce Perens) > 2. Re: Source code availability after end of life (Thorbj?rn Vynne) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 20:21:16 -0700 > From: Bruce Perens <bruce.per...@opensource.org> > To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Source code availability after end of > life > Message-ID: > < > cagat-edsgkejaeb5tew8596df2-+oxr16dvvtamocnhx3cz...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Is this really unclear? If you didn't distribute source code with the > binary, you need to make sure that it's kept available for three years > after the last time you distributed a binary copy, or the last time that > any of your business relationships such as dealers and distributors did. I > mention the dealers and distributors because the three-year obligation is > theirs as well, but they generally have no idea how to fulfill it. > Fulfilling the source code responsibility for them is better than having > them (and you) get sued, and then having them sue you. > > Because this is license-discuss, and I'm not here to market my services, I > will speak with your attorney _for_free_ if they need some clarity. > > Thanks > > Bruce > > 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, > under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of > Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: > > a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable > source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections > 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; > or, > > b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three > years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your > cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete > machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be > distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium > customarily used for software interchange; or, > > c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer > to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is > allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you > received the program in object code or executable form with such > an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.) > > > > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:02 AM, David Woolley <for...@david-woolley.me.uk> > wrote: > > > On 02/08/18 08:09, Thorbj?rn Vynne wrote: > > > > For an end-of-life commercial product that are using GPL based software, > >> can any one clarify if its a requirement to keep having making the > source > >> available even though no more products are shipped or serviced. > >> > > > > Please explain what is not clear in the wording of the GPL. In any case, > > if it is unclear, only your own lawyer can give you an opinion on which > you > > can safely rely. > > > > Also note that the GPL strongly hints that any commercial distributor > > should supply the source at the time they supply the binary; otherwise > they > > enter into a commitment to supply the source to non-customers. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > License-discuss mailing list > > License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > > _lists.opensource.org > > > > > > -- > Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering > Standards committee chair, license committee member, co-founder, Open > Source Initiative > President, Open Research Institute > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20180803/1b8f2614/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 09:57:47 +0200 > From: Thorbj?rn Vynne <thorbjorn.vy...@gmail.com> > To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] Source code availability after end of > life > Message-ID: > <CA+mZhVhKjUt=BjB-KorGZJUwpKQ= > 99139angy8a8drrop0j...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Got it > > Thanks Bruce. > > On Sat, Aug 4, 2018 at 6:17 AM Bruce Perens <bruce.per...@opensource.org> > wrote: > > > Is this really unclear? If you didn't distribute source code with the > > binary, you need to make sure that it's kept available for three years > > after the last time you distributed a binary copy, or the last time that > > any of your business relationships such as dealers and distributors did. > I > > mention the dealers and distributors because the three-year obligation is > > theirs as well, but they generally have no idea how to fulfill it. > > Fulfilling the source code responsibility for them is better than having > > them (and you) get sued, and then having them sue you. > > > > Because this is license-discuss, and I'm not here to market my services, > I > > will speak with your attorney _for_free_ if they need some clarity. > > > > Thanks > > > > Bruce > > > > 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, > > under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of > > Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: > > > > a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable > > source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections > > 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; > or, > > > > b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three > > years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your > > cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete > > machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be > > distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium > > customarily used for software interchange; or, > > > > c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer > > to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is > > allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you > > received the program in object code or executable form with such > > an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.) > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:02 AM, David Woolley < > for...@david-woolley.me.uk> > > wrote: > > > >> On 02/08/18 08:09, Thorbj?rn Vynne wrote: > >> > >> For an end-of-life commercial product that are using GPL based software, > >>> can any one clarify if its a requirement to keep having making the > source > >>> available even though no more products are shipped or serviced. > >>> > >> > >> Please explain what is not clear in the wording of the GPL. In any > case, > >> if it is unclear, only your own lawyer can give you an opinion on which > you > >> can safely rely. > >> > >> Also note that the GPL strongly hints that any commercial distributor > >> should supply the source at the time they supply the binary; otherwise > they > >> enter into a commitment to supply the source to non-customers. > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> License-discuss mailing list > >> License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > >> > >> > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Bruce Perens K6BP - CEO, Legal Engineering > > Standards committee chair, license committee member, co-founder, Open > > Source Initiative > > President, Open Research Institute > > _______________________________________________ > > License-discuss mailing list > > License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > > > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20180804/ad18e1c5/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@lists.opensource.org > > http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org > > > ------------------------------ > > End of License-discuss Digest, Vol 78, Issue 4 > ********************************************** >
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
